summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/t/t1506-rev-parse-diagnosis.sh
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLibravatar Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>2021-11-14 22:27:45 -0800
committerLibravatar Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>2021-12-03 10:16:00 -0800
commit44ba10d6712268d6a76557b054b0d16b75c9501f (patch)
tree002db882ece2ab6a240e495a169c6e06422289c8 /t/t1506-rev-parse-diagnosis.sh
parentGit 2.30 (diff)
downloadtgif-44ba10d6712268d6a76557b054b0d16b75c9501f.tar.xz
revision: use C99 declaration of variable in for() loop
There are certain C99 features that might be nice to use in our code base, but we've hesitated to do so in order to avoid breaking compatibility with older compilers. But we don't actually know if people are even using pre-C99 compilers these days. One way to figure that out is to introduce a very small use of a feature, and see if anybody complains, and we've done so to probe the portability for a few features like "trailing comma in enum declaration", "designated initializer for struct", and "designated initializer for array". A few years ago, we tried to use a handy for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) use(i); to introduce a new variable valid only in the loop, but found that some compilers we cared about didn't like it back then. Two years is a long-enough time, so let's try it again. If this patch can survive a few releases without complaint, then we can feel more confident that variable declaration in for() loop is supported by the compilers our user base use. And if we do get complaints, then we'll have gained some data and we can easily revert this patch. Helped-by: Martin Ă…gren <martin.agren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Diffstat (limited to 't/t1506-rev-parse-diagnosis.sh')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions